Eighty countries have signed a joint statement demanding the full restoration of shipping access through the Strait of Hormuz, arguing that continued disruption is hitting trade and energy markets already strained by parallel attacks in the Red Sea.

Bahrain's foreign minister, Abdullatif bin Rashid Al Zayani, presented the statement at a UN Security Council media stakeout on maritime security. The document urges implementation of Security Council Resolution 2817, adopted on 11 March 2026 with 13 votes in favour and two abstentions — China and Russia. The resolution condemns Iran's attacks against Gulf countries and Jordan and addresses threats to maritime navigation through the strait.

The demand lands at a moment when two of the world's most critical chokepoints are under pressure simultaneously. Roughly a fifth of globally traded oil and LNG transits Hormuz, and the signatories argue that safe passage cannot remain conditional on regional escalation.

What the statement calls for

The 80 signatories set out three core positions. First, all vessels must be able to use the strait safely and exercise their navigational rights under international law. Second, they oppose the imposition of tolls or any other restrictions on transit — a direct rejection of any attempt to monetise or gatekeep passage through the waterway. Third, they want the International Maritime Organization and regional partners to help establish conditions under which shipping companies can safely return to Hormuz.

The statement also stresses that seafarers should not be exposed to danger or used as leverage in the conflict — a pointed reference to the crew welfare concerns that have driven war-risk premiums and rerouting decisions across the region.

Red Sea warning

Beyond Hormuz, the statement condemns Iran's attacks on countries in the region and its interference with shipping through the strait. It also criticises renewed Houthi hostilities in Yemen and attacks targeting Saudi Arabia and commercial vessels in the Red Sea.

The signatories warn that further Houthi activity near Bab al-Mandeb could create additional difficulties for commercial vessels, compounding concerns over a major shipping route. For carriers and forwarders, that framing matters: if both Hormuz and Bab al-Mandeb remain compromised, operators face the unpalatable arithmetic of rerouting Gulf-origin cargo around the Cape of Good Hope while Gulf-bound flows lose their most direct corridor — a cost structure that lands squarely on shippers through rates, transit times and war-risk insurance.

Diplomatic channel, no details

Asked by Canada Free Press journalist Joseph Klein whether Bahrain or other Gulf countries had held indirect discussions with Iran, Al Zayani acknowledged the role of diplomatic channels but provided no details of any contacts. He added that a negotiated political solution remained the objective.

That answer signals the Gulf states are keeping a back channel open even as they press for enforcement of a resolution Tehran's allies — Beijing and Moscow — declined to endorse. The two abstentions suggest any coercive mechanism at the Security Council level will face resistance, leaving implementation dependent on regional diplomacy and maritime deterrence rather than binding UN action.

The statement remains open to additional UN member states to sign, which could broaden the coalition's weight in future maritime security negotiations.

What it means for shipping

For carriers, the commercial readout is straightforward. A coalition of 80 states — including the Gulf economies most exposed to Hormuz-dependent trade — is formally on record opposing transit tolls and restrictions, which removes one potential cost layer if passage normalises. The call for IMO involvement points toward a coordinated framework for safe-return conditions, the kind of signal operators typically need before redeploying capacity to Gulf lanes rather than routing around risk.

For shippers and forwarders, the statement is a marker, not a fix. Rates and war-risk premiums on Gulf-corridor trades will track actual transit security, not diplomatic communiqués. The reference to seafarers being used as leverage indicates crew safety remains the binding constraint on vessel deployments, and any credible safe-return framework will need to address it directly.

Watch for two signals next: whether additional member states add their names to the statement, and whether the diplomatic channels Al Zayani acknowledged produce any measurable easing of interference in Hormuz transit. Until then, the 11 March resolution and this statement define the political ceiling of the response — while the operational floor for Gulf shipping remains set by conditions on the water.